Science and Culture Today | Page 1374 | Discovering Design in Nature

Readers of Evolution News and Views will no doubt be familiar with the decision by Gregory L. Geoffroy, the president of Iowa State University, to deny tenure to Dr. Guillermo Gonzalez, an assistant professor and pro-I.D astronomer. It is obvious that Dr. Gonzalez, who was extraordinarily qualified for tenure, was denied tenure because of his pro-I.D. views.
One hundred and twenty Iowa State faculty members signed a petition denouncing Dr. Gonzalez’ viewpoints, and he was opposed by his department chairman and several faculty members who have made their bias against intelligent design scientists clear in public statements.

Fundamental to the argument of many Darwinists against intelligent design theory in biology is the assertion that design in biology is undetectable. Darwinists argue that biological design is undetectable because, while we have experience with ‘designers’ in archeology, forensic science, etc., we have no experience with designers in biology, and thus cannot reliably detect the work of a biological designer. Intelligent design proponents reply that there are reliable criteria that indicate design, regardless of whether we have actual knowledge of the designer.

He’s a young astronomer with dozens of articles in top journals; he has made an important discovery in the field of extrasolar planets; and he is a proponent of intelligent design, the idea that an intelligent force has shaped the Universe. It’s that last fact that Guillermo Gonzalez thinks has cost him his tenure at Iowa State University.

So begins Nature magazine’s story. Reporter Geoff Brumfiel goes on to lay out Gonzalez’s stellar professional credentials.

Gonzalez’s early career was far from controversial. He graduated with a PhD from the University of Washington, Seattle, in 1993 and did a postdoc at the University of Texas in Austin. “He proved himself very quickly,” says David Lambert, director of the university’s MacDonald Observatory. He and Gonzalez co-authored several papers on variable stars, and Lambert says that while there, the young Cuban immigrant was an impressive scientist. “He is one of the best postdocs I have had,” he says.

In my previous post on bloggers who were intolerant of ID-proponents in the academy, I highlighted University of Minnesota biologist P.Z. Myers’ admission that, “if someone comes up [for tenure] who claims that ID ‘theory’ is science, I will vote against them.” But Myers isn’t the only example; other influential Darwinist scientists and other academics have made similar comments. Jason Rosenhouse, assistant professor of mathematics at James Madison University, asks, if we “assume that Gonzalez’s ID advocacy played a significant role in the school’s decision,” then “[i]s that a bad thing?” His answer is clear: “No, it isn’t.” Rosenhouse explains how he believes it is reasonable to be intolerant of ID-proponents in the academy: In my view it is perfectly Read More ›

United States Senator and Republican presidential candidate Sam Brownback (R-KS) has issued a forceful statement expressing alarm over the denial of tenure to pro-intelligent design astronomer Guillermo Gonzalez at Iowa State University. According to Sen. Brownback, “such an assault on academic freedom does not bode well for the advancement of true science.”

Action Item:Help Guillermo Gonzalez in his fight for academic freedom. Contact ISU President Gregory L. Geoffroy at (515) 294-2042 or email him at president@iastate.edu and let him know that you support academic freedom for Dr. Gonzalez to follow the evidence wherever it leads. Pity John McCarroll, the poor PR person for Iowa State University: He has so little to work with in the Guillermo Gonzalez case, he apparently has to invent his facts in order to defend his university. Last week, for example, McCarroll put out a document claiming that tenure standards at ISU were “so high, that many good researchers have failed to satisfy the demands of earning tenure.” Then it turned out that ISU approved 91% of those Read More ›

While Iowa State University denied tenure this spring to gifted pro-ID astronomer Guillermo Gonzalez, it turns out that it decided at the same time to promote to full professor outspoken atheist Hector Avalos, religious studies professor and faculty adviser to the ISU Atheist and Agnostic Society. Avalos has led the charge against Gonzalez and intelligent design on ISU’s campus, helping to draft a 2005 petition denouncing intelligent design that ultimately was signed by more than 120 ISU faculty.

Apparently ISU professors who are horrified by the supposed mixing of metaphysics and scholarship on the part of ID proponents have no qualms about supporting Avalos’s explicit anti-religious propaganda, including his effort to equate the Bible with Hitler’s Mein Kampf (for more on Avalos’s view of the Bible, see below). It is worth pointing out that ISU issued a press release a few years ago boasting about Avalos’s appointment as the executive director of a group affiliated with the Council for Secular Humanism that seeks to debunk religion.

Avalos’s promotion to full professor comes just in time for the publication of his new book on the Bible later this month. According to the publisher’s description, Avalos argues in the book

An article today by Chronicle of Higher Education reporter Richard Monastersky reveals new evidence that further strengthens the case that pro-ID astronomer Guillermo Gonzalez was denied tenure at Iowa State University on illegitimate grounds, although Monastersky does his best to downplay the evidence through spin and speculation.

According to Monastersky, data from a prestigious Smithsonian/NASA astrophysics database show that Gonzalez has the highest rating for citations to his work of anyone in his department: “Mr. Gonzalez has a normalized h-index of 13,” the second highest in his department. The fact that Gonzalez—an Assistant Professor—is ranked higher than almost every other member of his department, including full tenured professors, is incredible.

I recently read Carl Zimmer’s response to my critique of his November, 2006 article in National Geographic. In this post I will discuss Zimmer’s response to me regarding embryology and developmental biology. The embryonic hourglass is the idea that vertebrate embryos (like those of fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals) start off developing very differently, converge with some similarities at the pharyngular stage, and then again diverge. I stated in my original article that “vertebrate embryos start off quite differently,” but that “Zimmer’s diagram selectively displays embryos from the encircled stage where they are most similar.” The implication is that this falsifies the idea that evolution proceeds by tacking on new stages of development because these vertebrate groups start off Read More ›